Skip to main content

I’ve crossed the Atlantic to be reasonable.

Dodsworth
(1936)

(SPOILERS) Prestige Samuel Goldwyn production – signifiers being attaching a reputable director, often William Wyler, to then-popular plays or classical literature, see also Dead End, Wuthering Heights, The Little Foxes, The Best Years of Our Lives, and earning a Best Picture nomination as a matter of course – that manages to be both engrossing and irritating. Which is to say that, in terms of characterisation, Dodsworth rather shows its years, expecting a level of engagement in the relationship between Sam Dodsworth (Walter Huston) and his wayward, fun-loving wife Fran (Ruth Chatterton) at odds with their unsympathetic behaviour.

Fran: I’m fighting for my life! You can’t drag me back!

There’s only so much of Sam being a walkover as his younger wife (but not that much younger), desperate to retain the illusion of youthful freedom, carries on with other men, one can take. So, even though he’s the injured party in this, he’s so much of a doormat that he loses our vote. Huston’s nevertheless very reliable, and likeable, as the retiree (from his firm Dodsworth Motors) who discovers life outside the business world to be rather vexing during a European trip as Fran engages in extended flirtations with younger men, first caddish Captain Lockert (David Niven) and then aristocratic Arnold Iselin (Paul Lukas).

Tubby: Would you lay off those European liberties with my wife?

Sidney Howard, who adapted his 1934 play, itself an adaptation of Sinclair Lewis’ 1929 novel, would go on to pen the likes of Raffles and Gone with the Wind, and Pauline Kael suggested the picture’s only problem was sticking too closely to the stage version (“It looks programmed and underpopulated, though in an elegantly stylised way”). It’s true that Dodsworth is very interior, and at times claustrophobic in sticking like glue to its main characters, but the issue is more one identified by Wyler, one he clashed with lead Chatterton over; Fran is an incredibly unsympathetic character (a “foolish horror”), whose utterly shallow obsession with her youth and retaining it for as long as possible ("You’ve got to let me have my fling now!") offers no chance of finding anything redeemable or relatable. Perhaps if Chatterton were comely (Fran refers to herself as “a wife who isn’t exactly plain”, but she has a face like a soup spoon), you might at least understand the attentions Mrs Dodsworth is getting from younger suitors, and her vain attempt to keep a hold of her most precious asset. Instead she just seems delusional, and the men keen on her idiots.

Sam: I’ve got nothing to do but look at ruined temples. They’ll keep. They’ve kept this long.

This in turn influences our view of Sam (a “true dreamer”). At first, his tolerance of his wife seems to be down to understanding the limits of the situation (“I suppose it’s up to me to go out and shoot him” he says drolly of Lockert’s indiscreet behaviour). There’s even a point when it looks as if he’s going to lay down the law (“I think I’ve been weak with you quite long enough”) before summarily wilting and retreating to New York. Only to then go and fetch her and be further rebuked. At this point, other factors come into play, illustrating the grotesque extent of Fran’s disregard for anything but herself. Their daughter is pregnant, but Mrs Dodsworth elects avoid returning home to see the baby, because it will be a stark reminder that she is now a grandma. Almost as damning is that Sam, very keen to see the wee tot, doesn’t go home anyway but instead decides to loaf around Europe; who’d want to be this pair’s offspring, given their response when you most need them to be there for you?

Fran: I hope I look as young as you do, when I’m your age.
Edith: You’re almost sure to, my dear.

This drag fortunately takes a turn when Sam falls in with the really rather nice Edith (Mary Astor, going through a highly scandalous, high profile divorce herself at the time), while Fran gets her comeuppance, told to sling her hook by Arnold’s overbearing mumsie (Maria Ouspenskaya, of The Wolf Man fame). Inevitably, this leads to an eleventh-hour call for Sam to return to his floozy wife, only for him to then see sense. So Dodsworth at least ends with a sliver of satisfaction, but there’s an awful lot of time spent en route with characters who are either entirely dislikeable or so lacking in judgement they may as well be.

Fran: All our friends think of me as young, and I am, I am.

One aspect that hasn’t aged, because it was evidently a pain on the eardrums at the time – if Graham Greene’s contemporary review is anything to go by – is the “almost incessant” music. It’s the equivalent of aural diarrhoea, sprayed indiscriminately across the soundtrack with wanton disregard for mood or, you know, actually enhancing a scene.

Fran: What’s going to become of me?
Sam: I don’t know. You’ll have to stop getting younger someday.

Dodsworth was nominated for seven Oscars, including Picture, Director, Actor (Huston), Supporting Actress (Ouspenskaya) and Screenplay. It won one, Art Direction for Richard Day. Few of the ten nominees carry much weight today, Mr. Deeds Goes to Town aside, and you’d likely not figure, coming to it cold, that Dodsworth had received such plaudits. Like its title character, the movie’s a bit of an old duffer, lacking self-awareness, youth and verve.


Popular posts from this blog

You were this amazing occidental samurai.

Ricochet (1991) (SPOILERS) You have to wonder at Denzel Washington’s agent at this point in the actor’s career. He’d recently won his first Oscar for Glory , yet followed it with less-than-glorious heart-transplant ghost comedy Heart Condition (Bob Hoskins’ racist cop receives Washington’s dead lawyer’s ticker; a recipe for hijinks!) Not long after, he dipped his tentative toe in the action arena with this Joel Silver production; Denzel has made his share of action fare since, of course, most of it serviceable if unremarkable, but none of it comes near to delivering the schlocky excesses of Ricochet , a movie at once ingenious and risible in its plot permutations, performances and production profligacy.

No one can be told what the Matrix is. You have to see it for yourself.

The Matrix  (1999) (SPOILERS) Twenty years on, and the articles are on the defining nature of The Matrix are piling up, most of them touching on how its world has become a reality, or maybe always was one. At the time, its premise was engaging enough, but it was the sum total of the package that cast a spell – the bullet time, the fashions, the soundtrack, the comic book-as-live-action framing and styling – not to mention it being probably the first movie to embrace and reflect the burgeoning Internet ( Hackers doesn’t really count), and subsequently to really ride the crest of the DVD boom wave. And now? Now it’s still really, really good.

Well, something’s broke on your daddy’s spaceship.

Apollo 13 (1995) (SPOILERS) The NASA propaganda movie to end all NASA propaganda movies. Their original conception of the perilous Apollo 13 mission deserves due credit in itself; what better way to bolster waning interest in slightly naff perambulations around a TV studio than to manufacture a crisis event, one emphasising the absurd fragility of the alleged non-terrestrial excursions and the indomitable force that is “science” in achieving them? Apollo 13 the lunar mission was tailor made for Apollo 13 the movie version – make believe the make-believe – and who could have been better to lead this fantasy ride than Guantanamo Hanks at his all-American popularity peak?

We’ve got the best ball and chain in the world. Your ass.

Wedlock (1991) (SPOILERS) The futuristic prison movie seemed possessed of a particular cachet around this time, quite possibly sparked by the grisly possibilities of hi-tech disincentives to escape. On that front, HBO TV movie Wedlock more than delivers its FX money shot. Elsewhere, it’s less sure of itself, rather fumbling when it exchanges prison tropes for fugitives-on-the-run ones.

I can’t be the worst. What about that hotdog one?

Everything Everywhere All at Once (2022) (SPOILERS) It would have been a merciful release, had the title card “ The End ”, flashing on screen a little before the ninety-minute mark, not been a false dawn. True, I would still have been unable to swab the bloody dildoes fight from my mind, but at least Everything Everywhere All at Once would have been short. Indeed, by the actual end I was put in mind of a line spoken by co-star James Wong in one of his most indelible roles: “ Now this really pisses me off to no end ”. Or to put it another way, Everything Everywhere All at Once rubbed me up the wrong which way quite a lot of most of the time.

Drank the red. Good for you.

Morbius (2022) (SPOILERS) Generic isn’t necessarily a slur. Not if, by implication, it’s suggestive of the kind of movie made twenty years ago, when the alternative is the kind of super-woke content Disney currently prioritises. Unfortunately, after a reasonable first hour, Morbius descends so resignedly into such unmoderated formula that you’re left with a too-clear image of Sony’s Spider-Verse when it lacks a larger-than-life performer (Tom Hardy, for example) at the centre of any given vehicle.

So, you’re telling me that NASA is going to kill the President of the United States with an earthquake?

Conspiracy Theory (1997) (SPOILERS) Mel Gibson’s official rehabilitation occurred with the announcement of 2016’s Oscar nominations, when Hacksaw Ridge garnered six nods, including Mel as director. Obviously, many refuse to be persuaded that there’s any legitimate atonement for the things someone says. They probably weren’t even convinced by Mel’s appearance in Daddy’s Home 2 , an act of abject obeisance if ever there was one. In other circles, though, Gibbo, or Mad Mel, is venerated as a saviour unsullied by the depraved Hollywood machine, one of the brave few who would not allow them to take his freedom. Or at least, his values. Of course, that’s frequently based on alleged comments he made, ones it’s highly likely he didn’t. But doesn’t that rather appeal to the premise of his 23-year-old star vehicle Conspiracy Theory , in which “ A good conspiracy theory is an unproveable one ”?

Twenty dwarves took turns doing handstands on the carpet.

Bugsy (1991) (SPOILERS) Bugsy is very much a Warren Beatty vanity project (aren’t they all, even the ones that don’t seem that way on the surface?), to the extent of his playing a title character a decade and a half younger than him. As such, it makes sense that producer Warren’s choice of director wouldn’t be inclined to overshadow star Warren, but the effect is to end up with a movie that, for all its considerable merits (including a script from James Toback chock full of incident), never really feels quite focussed, that it’s destined to lead anywhere, even if we know where it’s going.

He’ll regret it to his dying day, if ever he lives that long.

The Quiet Man (1952) (SPOILERS) The John Wayne & John Ford film for those who don’t like John Wayne & John Ford films? The Quiet Man takes its cues from Ford’s earlier How Green Was My Valley in terms of, well less Anglophile and Hibernophile and Cambrophile nostalgia respectively for past times, climes and heritage, as Wayne’s pugilist returns to his family seat and stirs up a hot bed of emotions, not least with Maureen O’Hara’s red-headed hothead. The result is a very likeable movie, for all its inculcated Oirishness and studied eccentricity.

He doesn’t want to lead you. He just wants you to follow.

Fantastic Beasts: The Secrets of Dumbledore (2022) (SPOILERS) The general failing of the prequel concept is a fairly self-evident one; it’s spurred by the desire to cash in, rather than to tell a story. This is why so few prequels, in any form, are worth the viewer/reader/listener’s time, in and of themselves. At best, they tend to be something of a well-rehearsed fait accompli. In the movie medium, even when there is material that withstands closer inspection (the Star Wars prequels; The Hobbit , if you like), the execution ends up botched. With Fantastic Beasts , there was never a whiff of such lofty purpose, and each subsequent sequel to the first prequel has succeeded only in drawing attention to its prosaic function: keeping franchise flag flying, even at half-mast. Hence Fantastic Beasts: The Secrets of Dumbledore , belatedly arriving after twice the envisaged gap between instalments and course-correcting none of the problems present in The Crimes of Grindelwald .